Effects of structured writing versus nonstructured writing as an effective and efficient teaching and learning strategy
This research investigated the effectiveness and efficiency of structured writing as compared to traditional nonstructured writing as a teaching and learning strategy in a training session for teachers.^ Structured writing is a method of identifying, interrelating, sequencing, and graphically displaying information on fields of a page or computer. It is an alternative for improving training and educational outcomes by providing an effective and efficient documentation methodology.^ The problem focuses upon the contradiction between: (a) the supportive research and theory to modify traditional methods of written documents and information presentation and (b) the existing paradigm to continue with traditional communication methods.^ A MANOVA was used to determine significant difference between a control and an experimental group in a posttest only experimental design. The experimental group received the treatment of structured writing materials during a training session. Two variables were analyzed. They were: (a) effectiveness; correct items on a posttest, and (b) efficiency; time spent on test.^ The quantitative data showed a difference for the experimental group on the two dependent variables. The experimental group completed the posttest in 2 minutes less time while scoring 1.5 more items correct. An interview with the training facilitators revealed that the structured writing materials were "user friendly." ^
Education, Teacher Training|Language, Rhetoric and Composition|Education, Curriculum and Instruction
Kenneth John Stevenson,
"Effects of structured writing versus nonstructured writing as an effective and efficient teaching and learning strategy"
(January 1, 1997).
ProQuest ETD Collection for FIU.